2024 CHEVROLET TAHOE Complaints

The contact owns a 2024 Chevrolet Tahoe. The contact stated that while driving at 76 MPH, the vehicle was driving abnormally rough. The RPM increased, and the message to shut-off engine and restart the vehicle was displayed. The contact stated that the failure occurred while the two minor children and their friends were inside the vehicle. The contact's daughter stated that the vehicle was in neutral after leaving the car wash. In addition, the failure occurred while driving on a busy two-lane highway. The vehicle was almost involved in a crash twice when the engine seized in the middle of the left lane. The contact stated that while attempting to drive the vehicle to the shoulder of the road, the engine seized. The contact stated that while attempting to start the vehicle, the vehicle failed to restart. The local Police assisted with traffic control. The vehicle was towed to the dealer; however, the failure was not duplicated. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The dealer was informed that the Mobile App indicated a transmission and engine failure. The dealer informed the contact that because the engine seized, the engine needed to be replaced. The dealer informed the contact that there was no indication of what caused the engine to seize. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure but provided no assistance. The contact referenced an unknown recall with a similar description; however, the VIN was not associated with the unknown recall. The contact was advised to contact the NHTSA Hotline to report the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 16,988.

PICOSCOPE test passed on 2/3/2026 with mileage of 58061 at Everett Chevrolet, Benton, AR. On [XXX], while driving received an error code, no oil pressure and vehicle became disabled in the middle of the road. Tahoe was towed to Teeter Chevrolet in Malvern, AR. We were notified on Friday that the engine was bad and would need to be replaced. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

SUV states brake system failure, tell driver not to drive over 43 miles per hour, attempted to have repairs continue to have repeat service with same issues, notified gm customer service of concerns regarding safety of vehicle with no brakes or steering control however vehicle states owner can drive, this is not safe to general public nor myself and family, gm staff stated could have towed did not seemed concerned for safety of the alert given as there is no current recall on this vin

The contact owns a 2024 Chevrolet Tahoe. The contact stated that on four occasions while in reverse (R), the "Service Transmission" message was displayed, and the vehicle failed to reverse. The contact was able to shift into drive(D). The vehicle was taken to a dealer on four separate occasions, where it was diagnosed and determined that the transmission shifter had failed and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was repaired all four times, but the failure reoccurred. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 4,293.

Dealer checked the 6.2L motor for known defects. It "passed" inspection on 11/20/25 and got the thicker oil (OW-40). The engine lost propulsion ("died") 3 times on a 55mph State Highway on 02/09/26 with my 4 year old in the car with me. It died and came to a complete stop in one lane and would not re-start initially with cars almost rear ending us and needing to aggressively swerve to avoid hitting us. After 4 or 5 attempts it started again (making terrible grinding noises) so I could get it off the road before it died again. It started again to drive home on the back roads approximately 1 mile. Low oil pressure and check engine lights came on. I also received notifications from onstar and from the my Chevy app that there were severe motor or transmission problems. I scanned it with an OBD II Scanner and it has code P00016 (Camshaft Position Correlation - Bank 1 Sensor A). It got towed to the dealer and is now confirmed it is in need of a full motor replacement less than 3 months after they told me the motor passed inspection! This is not acceptable. To be told it's fine and then have it fail with my child in the car is extremely unsafe. Now I'm stuck trying to get a comparable loaner vehicle from the dealer to drive in the snow and mountains with my family safely while they expect to have the vehicle at minimum of 6 weeks. So far they have not found a loaner potentially putting my family in further danger by not having a 4X4 vehicle in a snowy climate.

I have a 2024 Tahoe that was purchased new from the dealer and has 13,700mi. The first service was completed as required in December with no issues identified. Less than 2 months later the front wheels started making a squeaking sound intermittently when accelerating, coasting or breaking. There were no warning messages. The dealership/mechanic looked over the car & said that the front brakes were measuring 2mm (completely worn out) but no other issues. Before drop off the car computer said above 75% or more for front and rear breaks (green). I have been driving the car in normal condition in southern ca. It seems that the break pads were defective and degraded at an alarming/unsafe rate or that a different component on the car caused them the continuously rub and wear down. The dealership blamed it on owner operation even though they supposedly checked them 2 months before and didn't see abnormal signs of wear. I am very concerned with the QUALITY, RELIABILITY & SAFETY of the front breaking system due to the fact that the breaks wore out so fast. I am worried that the problem has not been properly identified and that that breaks will continue to have this problem if it wasn't caused by faulty pads. I have never had a break wear problem like this before on any of the other 5 new cars that I have owned. This is the first American brand car I have owned and hopefully it's not a sign of things to come.

Driving on the New jersey Turpike I passed through the ez pass tolls traveling west bound on Bayview Ave bridge, the vehicle shut off without warning. No check engine light or noise, just no propulsion or anything. Dead in the water. Vehicle would not restart.

Vehicle lost all braking capability while in motion. Vehicle rolled to a stop with no brakes with warnings for brake system failure, no front collision active. Upon restarting the vehicle the warnings didnt not go way for 1hr. 2 hours later the warnings cleared from the information system but codes remains. Vehicle was taken to Uptown Chevrolet, Slinger WI and was informed of a bad battery as the "cause" of the issue. A bad battery should not result in the loss of braking capability on any vehicle!

Front passenger wheel has a fracture. The structural integrity of the wheel is compromised and is causing the tire to leak air, which is dangerous and can cause loss of vehicle control and damage to suspension or brakes. It could also cause dangerous blowouts, which causes a safety concern for me and others on the road if that happens. The problem has been confirmed by the dealership where the vehicle was purchased. Photos were taken and submitted to GM for warranty. The warranty was denied. The vehicle has not been inspected by anyone else other than the dealership where the vehicle was purchased. The only warning lamps were low tire pressure warning. The fracture was found during inspection as to the cause of the low tire pressure.

The vehicle in question had approximately 5000 miles when low oil light came on, it was 2 quarts low. this was after the first oil change at around 3500 miles. I had the dealer do an oil consumption evaluation. They check the oil every 500 miles and confirmed it was using 2 quarts every 2500 miles. They informed me GM says this is normal. I cannot disagree more with that claim. GM knows they have a problem with the 6.2-liter engine. I have researched the issue and found they have a problem with the crankshaft machining and the oil delivery port beveling that delivers lubrication to the connecting rod bearing appears to be too large that causes the motor oil not to consistently keep the bearing lubricated. This causes the engine to be an "oil burner" and premature failure of the bearing. They think putting a heavier viscosity of oil in will delay the inevitable engine failure, which makes me believe they are aware of the faulty manufacturing and want to run from their warranty responsibilities.